#43 Vascular Intervention for Multiple Sclerosis

CLINICAL QUESTION

QUESTION CLINIQUE

In patients with multiple sclerosis (MS), is angioplasty of obstructed extra-cranial venous lesions safe and does it improve MS symptoms?

BOTTOM LINE

RÉSULTAT FINAL

The initial study seemed promising, but was critically flawed for assessing benefit, and subsequent studies are generally not supportive. Presently, endovascular angioplasty for MS should not be recommended. The fluctuating nature of relapsing-remitting MS necessitates a long-term, multi-center, blinded RCT to determine if endovascular angioplasty is beneficial.

Reading Tools for Practice Article can earn you MainPro+ Credits

La lecture d'articles d'outils de pratique peut vous permettre de gagner des crédits MainPro+

Join Now S’inscrire maintenant

Already a CFPCLearn Member? Log in

Déjà abonné à CMFCApprendre? Ouvrir une session

EVIDENCE

DONNÉES PROBANTES

Original cohort study, 65 MS patients with chronic cerebrospinal venous insufficiency (CCSVI) who all underwent angioplasty for obstructed azygous or internal jugular venous lesions.¹

Participants: Mean age 41, 46% male, minimal to moderate disability (not in wheelchair), taking MS disease-modifying agents.
Vascular outcomes: No serious operative or immediate post-operative complications.
- Re-stenosis at 1-year ~50% for internal jugular.
Neurological outcomes at 18 months, compared to baseline (no control/placebo group):
- No benefit seen in primary or secondary progressive MS subtypes.
- Significant improvements in relapsing-remitting MS subtype.
  - Fewer patients relapsing over 1-year (50% versus 73%, p=0.0014).
  - Fewer patients with MRI lesions (12% versus 50%, p<0.0001).
  - Improved MS functional composite and quality of life scores.
- Concerns: Single study site, not randomized, no control group, and unblinded.
  - Remission is a hallmark of relapsing-remitting MS: Untreated patients can have reductions (even prolonged) in clinical symptoms2,3 and/or MRI lesions.⁴ A control group and long-term follow-up essential.

Small double-blind RCT of internal jugular or azygous vein angioplasty found nonsignificantly higher relapse rates in the treatment arm (3/9 patients) versus the sham arm (1/10 patients) and higher rates of new MRI lesions in treatment group at six months.⁵ Context:

Hypothesis of CCSVI and MS: Chronic insufficient cerebral venous drainage à cerebral iron deposits à engender the immune response underlying MS. Angioplasty improves cerebral blood outflow à decreases cerebral iron deposits à improves MS symptoms.⁶
Many patients are having this unproven procedure, and serious complications are being observed.^7,8
Subsequent studies question the relationship between CCSVI and MS.^9-14
Provider organizations and patient groups state there is no indication of a connection between CCSVI and MS and there are risks associated with angioplasty therapy.^15,16

updated mar 8 2011 by braiden

Latest Tools for Practice

Derniers outils pour la pratique

December 6, 2024

#379 Bumpin’ Up the Protection? RSV Vaccine in Pregnancy

How effective and safe is the respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) vaccine (AbrysvoTM) when given during pregnancy?

Read Lire 0.25 credits available Crédits disponibles

November 22, 2024

#378 Tony Romo-sozumab: Winning touchdown in osteoporosis or interception for the loss?

What is the efficacy and safety of romosozumab in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis?

Read Lire 0.25 credits available Crédits disponibles

November 8, 2024

#377 How to slow the flow IV: Combined oral contraceptives

In premenopausal heavy menstrual bleeding due to benign etiology, do combined oral contraceptives (COC) improve patient outcomes?

Read Lire 0.25 credits available Crédits disponibles

March 8, 2011

This content is certified for MainPro+ Credits, log in to access

Ce contenu est certifié pour les crédits MainPro+, Ouvrir une session

🔒 Complete Activity

🔒 Compléter l’activité

Author(s)

Auteur(s)

G. Michael Allan MD CCFP
Ken Makus MD FRCPC
Michael R Kolber MD CCFP MSc

1. Zamboni P, Galeotti R, Menegatti E, et al. J Vasc Surg. 2009; 50:1348-58.

2. Martinez-Yelamos S, Martinez-Yelamos A, Martin-Ozaeta G, et al. Mult Scler. 2006; 12:826-9.

3. PRISMS Study Group. Lancet. 1998; 352:1498-504.

4. Zhao Y, Traboulsee A, Petkau AJ, et al. Neurology. 2008; 70:1092-7.

5. Siddiqui AH, Zivadinov R, Benedict RHB, et al. Neurology. 2014; 83:441-9.

6. Singh AV, Zamboni P. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 2009; 29:1867-78.

7. Samson K. Ann Neurol. 2010; 67(1):A13-5.

8. Kuehn BM. JAMA. 2012; 307:2575-6.

9. Doepp F, Paul F, Valdueza JM, et al. Ann Neurol. 2010; 68:173-83.

10. Sundstrom P, Wahlin A, Ambarki K, et al. Ann Neurol. 2010; 68:255-9.

11. Baracchini C, Perini P, Calabrese M, et al. Ann Neurol. 2011; 69:90-9.

12. Zivadinov R, Marr K, Cutter G, et al. Neurology. 2011; 77(2):138-44.

13. Tsivgoulis G, Sergentanis TN, Chan A, et al. Ther Adv Neurol Disord. 2014; 7(2):114-36.

14. Laupacis A, Lillie E, Dueck A, et al. CMAJ. 2011; 183(16):E1203-12.

15. Multiple Sclerosis Society of Canada. Chronic Cerebrospinal Venous Insufficiency (CCSVI). Available from: https://beta.mssociety.ca/research-news/hot-topics-in-research/chronic-cerebrospinal-venous-insufficiency-ccsvi. Accessed March 3, 2015.

16. National Multiple Sclerosis Society. CCSVI and MS. Available from: http://www.nationalmssociety.org/Research/Research-News-Progress/Research-News/CCSVI/CCSVI-and-MS-FAQ. Accessed March 5, 2015.

Authors do not have any conflicts of interest to declare.

Les auteurs n’ont aucun conflit d’intérêts à déclarer.